Many companies sell product or services but at the same time cause environmental damage. Some said it can be stop by ask them to pay penalty such as a higher tax when they cause the environment damage. Other said there are better ways to stop them for harming environment. What do you think is the best way to prevent the environment from deteriorating?
In contemporary times, as the attention being paid to the balance of environmentalconservation and economics development, the statement whether the company which sell products and services but damages environment should be punished or stopped has become exceedingly debatable and gained a variety of views. From my perspective, I cannot see eye to eye on the argument since only with an analysis of case by case basis could we draw a more rational conclusion.
To start with, it is undeniable that enforcing companies which create production to pay penalty such as tax if they cause damage of environment especially for those developing areas or countries. In the whole world all of the countries are striving to take up market, which means enhancing the development of economics could stand out of other countries and have power to guarantee the stability of the countries themselves and level of citizens' life. For those companies which will bring marvelous benefits to both countries and people's lives, paying penalty is enough for them to come up with some method to reduce pollution. In contrast, if those companies which are urged to stop and lead to great amount of economics loss just because of produce environmental damage, the countries will not develop in a stable step. Shanghai is a great example in this case. China is a developing country which needs to promote economic development. Thus in Shanghai there are all kinds of industries around to maintain the products and service for individuals daily needs. However, those companies increased the pollution in the surroundings, which made government enforce the law to limit their damage of environment. The companies need to pay greatly high taxes in their profit. Gradually those companies didn't close but they started to use some pollution processing equipment to try to reduce the extent of environment damage. Therefore, for those developing countries whose priority is development of economy, companies which bring environmental damages should pay penalty.
Despite the fact that for some areas it is unnecessary to stop companies to preserve environment, it doesn't means that companies should never be stopped. For those development countries which are supposed to concern more about environment conservation, they should stop the industries which sacrifice the environment for their profits. In development areas, people no long need to worry about their daily support or social welfare but increasing people tend to consider the relationship with individuals health and environment. Thus, in those countries, governments should close those companies which produce daily needs but damage environment in order to creat a environmentally friendly society. My friend Mary's hometown can be served as a great example. The city she lives is a development area where people live a pleased and joyful life since there are no burden from income. For poor people government would first give them financial support and help them find jobs. And the main reason people want to stay their is that the environment protection policy is well established there. The companies which have the action to destroy environment would be forced to stop unless they figure out some methods to avoid their release of toxic pollution. Hence, poeple their enjoy their great environment and breathe fresh air every day. So it is reasonable that for those developing areas protecting environment is the most crucial thing to be done and stopping companies which bring pollutions is one reliable method.
From the above-mentioned example we could draw a conclusion that for developing countries it is practical to handle environmental damage into economical compensation while for development areas, industries which damage environment should be stopped.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... areas or countries. In the whole world all of the countries are striving to take up marke...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 942, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... needs to promote economic development. Thus in Shanghai there are all kinds of indu...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1300, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...their profit. Gradually those companies didnt close but they started to use some poll...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 102, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...p companies to preserve environment, it doesnt means that companies should never be st...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 664, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ut damage environment in order to creat a environmentally friendly society. My f...
^
Line 5, column 1016, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...And the main reason people want to stay their is that the environment protection poli...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, so, therefore, thus, well, while, in contrast, such as, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 15.1003584229 166% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.0286738351 199% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 43.0788530466 102% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 52.1666666667 148% => OK
Nominalization: 38.0 8.0752688172 471% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3207.0 1977.66487455 162% => OK
No of words: 596.0 407.700716846 146% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38087248322 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94096258147 4.48103885553 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01784169141 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 296.0 212.727598566 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496644295302 0.524837075471 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 999.0 618.680645161 161% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8283502887 48.9658058833 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.28 100.406767564 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.84 20.6045352989 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.04 5.45110844103 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 3.85842293907 311% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.23372303424 0.236089414692 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.074419855398 0.076458572812 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0578920772363 0.0737576698707 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136271310175 0.150856017488 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.054313897508 0.0645574589148 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 11.7677419355 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 86.8835125448 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 21.0 10.002688172 210% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.